Jump to content

Church completes digitization for billions of family history records


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

What a great story:

I think this is very good.  I have spent many years watching people criticize and bash my faith, often for what it fails to do, or fails to do sufficiently.  These are fairly subjective, eye-of-the-beholder type criticisms.  Some raise fair points, but I think most are unfair, overblown, presumptuous, etc.

Of course the Church can and should improve in how it functions in and contributes to society.  It is in something of a unique situation to contribute by amassing and freely distributing genealogical records, and I am glad to see the Church doing this.

Again, very cool.

Thanks,

-Smac

I fear not enough of Church members who are otherwise faithful and devoted really comprehend and appreciate the amazing strides that have been made in a relatively short time with regard to family history and temple work. 
 

What it means, of course, is that it is now easier and more convenient than we would have thought possible not long ago to take names of ancestors and relatives from our own lines to the temple, there to help provide them with the saving ordinances of the gospel. 
 

A few weeks ago, my newly endowed son and I went to the temple to receive initiatory ordinances vicariously for some relatives on our own lines. This is the first time I have been able to do that for my own people. 
 

I wish I could say this was a result of my own diligent and painstaking research, but literally all it required was for me to go to my FamilySearch account and click on a button. I printed out the resulting name cards and took them to the temple, all ready for the ordinances. 
 

For most of my life, I have thought I probably would never be able to do work for my own relatives. The research process involving hours of tedious gazing at microfilms always seemed so daunting and inaccessible to me. And what meager efforts I’ve made in the past have only turned up names of people for whom ordinance work had already been performed, so I was stuck in the proverbial my-work-has-already-been-done mindset. My mind has been opened with the recent strides. 
 

The names I took to the temple were from peripheral lines (cousins) but that’s quite all right according to the Church’s guidelines. 
 

I hope in the near future to contribute my efforts to the indexing of records, thus adding to the pool that makes it convenient for others to find their ancestors needing temple work as I did mine. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment

I'm on there as are a lot of my relatives.  Already gave a buddy permission to have him or his kids dunk me after I'm dead if they want.  Figure it'll be cool to hang out with Vlad Tepes.  Best lawn and garden decorator ever.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I fear not enough of Church members who are otherwise faithful and devoted really comprehend and appreciate the amazing strides that have been made in a relatively short time with regard to family history and temple work. 
 

What it means, of course, is that it is now easier and more convenient than we would have thought possible not long ago to take names of ancestors and relatives from our own lines to the temple, there to help provide them with the saving ordinances of the gospel. 
 

A few weeks ago, my newly endowed son and I went to the temple to receive initiatory ordinances vicariously for some relatives on our own lines. This is the first time I have been able to do that for my own people. 
 

I wish I could say this was a result of my own diligent and painstaking research, but literally all it required was for me to go to my FamilySearch account and click on a button. I printed out the resulting name cards and took them to the temple, all ready for the ordinances. 
 

For most of my life, I have thought I probably would ever be able to do work for my own relatives. The research process involving hours of tedious gazing at microfilms always seemed so daunting and inaccessible to me. And what meager efforts I’ve made in the past have only turned up names of people for whom ordinance work had already been performed, so I was stuck in the proverbial my-work-has-already-been-done mindset. My mind has been opened with the recent strides. 
 

The names I took to the temple were from peripheral lines (cousins) but that’s quite all right according to the Church’s guidelines. 
 

I hope in the near future to contribute my efforts to the indexing of records, thus adding to the pool that makes it convenient for others to find their ancestors needing temple work as I did mine. 

I did indexing for a short time. It was very interesting. I need to get back to it:)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Peacefully said:

I did indexing for a short time. It was very interesting. I need to get back to it:)

My wife is working on 16th century photographs of British parish records, hand written, and the hardest part is reading the script! But she sees it as a puzzle, and loves it!

Link to comment

My dear MIL, did extraction work, that's what they called it back then. I even think they awarded her something for all the hours, in the span of many, many years. She even flew to England with a friend and went to courthouses, cemeteries, etc. Sadly, she is losing her eyesight and has dry macular degeneration.

So we for sure owe a debt of gratitude to all those that help/helped make this happen! :)

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

My wife volunteers at our local FH library, and the predominant groups who attend are Jewish people and African Americans who are not members!

She gets a lot of questions about why "Mormons" do family history- it's a great missionary tool!

We don't appreciate what we have!

I learned years ago that by far, the majority of the patrons at a typical Church family history center are not Church members. 

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I learned years ago that by far, the majority of the patrons at a typical Church family history center are not Church members. 

Sometimes even the helpers aren’t church members, at least in the past. I worked with two nonmembers every Wednesday evening when I lived in Kansas in ‘88 iirc. They were much more knowledgeable than I was, so I basically ignored I was technically the boss. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

My dear MIL, did extraction work, that's what they called it back then.

Extraction and indexing are not the same thing.

The Name Extraction Program (later called the Family Record Extraction Program) was implemented years ago because back then, there were not enough names produced from Church members’ own family history research alone to keep the temples busy. Extraction workers were called in the wards and stakes to “extract” names directly from the microfilmed records to fill in the gap. 
 

But within the last decade or so, such extraction efforts have been no longer necessary, because there are now enough names provided from Church members’ own family history efforts to keep the temples well supplied. And there are many more temples in the world today than there were back in the days when extraction projects were flourishing! 
 

That’s another “great story” that ought  to be highlighted, Smac. 
 

Of course this is not only due to the Church members’ diligence in doing family history, but to the amazing growth in technology, the digitization of microfilmed records and the work of thousands of volunteers around the world to index those digitized records, making family history research so much easier and more convenient to do (see my post above, the second one in this thread). 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I learned years ago that by far, the majority of the patrons at a typical Church family history center are not Church members. 

Well also we have had a couple of Jewish and African American organizations donate their collections of records, primarily in book form, because they had no place to house them or train their people.  We provided the space for them to safely store their records

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sometimes even the helpers aren’t church members, at least in the past. I worked with two nonmembers every Wednesday evening when I lived in Kansas in ‘88 iirc. They were much more knowledgeable than I was, so I basically ignored I was technically the boss. 

Well also they are more likely to know the languages- we also have a sizable Polish collection 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sometimes even the helpers aren’t church members, at least in the past. I worked with two nonmembers every Wednesday evening when I lived in Kansas in ‘88 iirc. They were much more knowledgeable than I was, so I basically ignored I was technically the boss. 

I don’t doubt this is the case elsewhere as well. Family history is an extremely popular hobby around the world. I was told some years ago that family history is the second-most frequent pursuit on the internet. The most frequent, alas, is pornography. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Well also we have had a couple of Jewish and African American organizations donate their collections of records, primarily in book form, because they had no place to house them or train their people.  We provided the space for them to safely store their records

 

I hope they allowed the Church to microfilm and/or digitize those records, thus making them accessible to everybody. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

My wife volunteers at our local FH library, and the predominant groups who attend are Jewish people and African Americans who are not members!

She gets a lot of questions about why "Mormons" do family history- it's a great missionary tool!

We don't appreciate what we have!

It's awesome that your wife gets that opportunity, Dude!  (Um, I mean, Brother Dude!  Sorry! ;) :D)  And you're right: We don't realize what we have.  As Cinderella* sang so well, "Don't know what you got 'til it's gone."

*The group, not the fairy tale star.

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

It's awesome that your wife gets that opportunity, Dude!  (Um, I mean, Brother Dude!  Sorry! ;) :D)  And you're right: We don't realize what we have.  As Cinderella* sang so well, "Don't know what you got 'til it's gone."

*The group, not the fairy tale star.

“Big Yellow Taxi”? I thought that was recorded by Joni Mitchell and, later, The Neighborhood. 

 

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

“Big Yellow Taxi”? I thought that was recorded by Joni Mitchell and, later, The Neighborhood. 

 

Good song, as well, but I was thinking of a different one.  Sorry for any confusion. :)

Link to comment
10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

My wife is working on 16th century photographs of British parish records, hand written, and the hardest part is reading the script! But she sees it as a puzzle, and loves it!

You ought to consider getting involved with it along with her as your circumstances allow. You don’t need a special calling to do it. A participant doesn’t even have to be a member of the Church. A good many are not. 

Link to comment
18 hours ago, smac97 said:

What a great story:

I think this is very good.  I have spent many years watching people criticize and bash my faith, often for what it fails to do, or fails to do sufficiently.  These are fairly subjective, eye-of-the-beholder type criticisms.  Some raise fair points, but I think most are unfair, overblown, presumptuous, etc.

Of course the Church can and should improve in how it functions in and contributes to society.  It is in something of a unique situation to contribute by amassing and freely distributing genealogical records, and I am glad to see the Church doing this.

Again, very cool.

Thanks,

-Smac

Hopefully every poster here can agree on this one thing.  This is an amazing accomplishment and a wonderful gift to the world of genealogical work.  As a fan of family history, I love this story and look forward to being able to expand my family tree and have access to new information to gain further understanding into the lives of my ancestors and further my appreciation for their sacrifices of which I am the beneficiary. 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Calm said:

Sometimes even the helpers aren’t church members, at least in the past. I worked with two nonmembers every Wednesday evening when I lived in Kansas in ‘88 iirc. They were much more knowledgeable than I was, so I basically ignored I was technically the boss. 

Technicalities!  ;) 

"Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore!" 

     —Dorothy, to her beloved furry, four-legged companion

     in The Wizard of Oz (1939)

Edited by Kenngo1969
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Hopefully every poster here can agree on this one thing.  This is an amazing accomplishment and a wonderful gift to the world of genealogical work.  As a fan of family history, I love this story and look forward to being able to expand my family tree and have access to new information to gain further understanding into the lives of my ancestors and further my appreciation for their sacrifices of which I am the beneficiary. 

That might be the first thing you've ever said on this board with which I agree without reservation, trepidation, or caveat of any kind.  Our disagreements notwithstanding, I laud you, Sir! :) 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You ought to consider getting involved with it along with her as your circumstances allow. You don’t need a special calling to do it. A participant doesn’t even have to be a member of the Church. A good many are not. 

Yes thanks, I know. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Extraction and indexing are not the same thing.

The Name Extraction Program (later called the Family Record Extraction Program) was implemented years ago because back then, there were not enough names produced from Church members’ own family history research alone to keep the temples busy. Extraction workers were called in the wards and stakes to “extract” names directly from the microfilmed records to fill in the gap. 
 

But within the last decade or so, such extraction efforts have been no longer necessary, because there are now enough names provided from Church members’ own family history efforts to keep the temples well supplied. And there are many more temples in the world today than there were back in the days when extraction projects were flourishing! 
 

That’s another “great story” that ought  to be highlighted, Smac. 
 

Of course this is not only due to the Church members’ diligence in doing family history, but to the amazing growth in technology, the digitization of microfilmed records and the work of thousands of volunteers around the world to index those digitized records, making family history research so much easier and more convenient to do (see my post above, the second one in this thread). 

Good to know! So didn't her efforts help though? And were the names she found added to this base of names that are digitized? Sorry to appear so dumb. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...